Sorry but business wise what Eddie said doesn't make sense. And if it doesn't make business sense then you have to consider alterior motives.

Let's use some logic.

What is the biggest fight in the heavyweight division right now?

Simple answer AJ vs Wilder. I don't think anyone would dispute that.

So Wilder says let's fight and the reply is okay but after these 2 other fights.

Let's then consider if those 2 other fights must be done first as stated.

No, they don't actually need to be done. If he fights and beats Pulev he has the same number of belts as if he fights and beats Wilder, stripped of one, gains one, the same. So they are arguing to be in the same spot but with less money after the fight.

So it must be about more future earnings right? Well, if Wilder loses which is just as likely as Wilder building his profile while they put it off obviously that is a huge loss in the back end. Potential gain if Wilder builds his profile. But not much because Wilder is already the fight most coveted. But, if he fights and beats Wilder then AJ is a bigger star with more immediate money AND Pulev can pick up that belt. Now 1 unification fight has become 2. Now Pulev is more valuable. So more money on front end and back end.

Eddies story doesn't wash. As most why we shouldn't fight stories tend to go.